Create a QR code containing a vCard 3.0 contact.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| org | No | Optional organization. | |
| name | Yes | Contact display name. | |
| No | Optional email address. | ||
| phone | No | Optional phone number. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations include readOnlyHint:true, which is slightly counterintuitive for a 'create' action but consistent with generating a QR code (no side effects). Description does not elaborate on behavior or return format.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but could benefit from more structure or additional context (e.g., output format). No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Description is adequate for a simple tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, but it lacks details on the return value (e.g., image URL or data). An agent may need to infer behavior.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool creates a QR code with vCard 3.0 contact info, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like qr_text or qr_wifi.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., qr_payment, qr_text). Implied context of contact sharing but no explicit exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct QR code type or action: payment (single/batch), reading, text, vCard, and WiFi. No overlap in purpose; descriptions clearly differentiate.
All tools follow a consistent 'qr_<purpose>' pattern (e.g., qr_payment, qr_read). Underscores and lowercase are used uniformly.
Six tools cover the core QR generation and reading needs without being excessive. Each tool has a clear role, and the count feels appropriate for the domain.
The tool set covers common QR code types (text, vCard, WiFi) and payment QR both singly and in batch, plus a decoder. No significant gaps for the stated purpose.